It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Somehow I doubt Cavill will succeed Craig.
History has shown that actors who were chosen to be Bond and effectively not cast got the role later.
Moore, Dalton, Brosnan.
Cavill will go down the same road. He was almost Bond in 2005.
I'm certain it is more than likely he will succeed Craig.
UNLCE or Superman has nothing to do with it.
Having said this, my choice still is Dan Stevens.
Revisiting actors who were once considered obviously has happened but in Cavill's case he has absolutely no chance. Hell will freeze over first before EoN cast Cavill as Bond.
I wish he were, but sadly, he is too old I think.
Cavill was his first choice; I'd like to see if he could produce another Golden Eye or Casino Royale.
He believed in Cavill
How old is Martin Campbell ?
I really want him to introduce one more Bond actor, he did a great job with Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig
You're right of course, age doesn't seem to be a factor with most directors.
Only BB didn't believe in Cavill.
Imagine Cavill would have become Bond. I'm certain he would have managed quite well and he could continue to be Bond for another decade. Imagine that!
How many film would that equate to? I feel that 4 film is about the right number, especially now with the 3 year gaps. But I'm not all that keen on Cavill taking over as Bond, there's something about the way that he carries himself, he is like younger Brosnan.
Of course, I do not want Cavill as Bond.
I just wanted to express that with choosing a young actor (which would have made more sense even) the discussion of succession would not happen for another decade.
That would have been the right choice and direction and the long gaps wouldn't have mattered that much.
Brosnan was a baby-faced wimp when he was as old as Cavill was in 2005.
Cavill on the other hand was buff and looked very, very good (just watch the first episode of The Tudors ;) )
My point is in 2005 they should have cast an actor not older than 30.
I think Pierce carried himself very well especially since Tomorrow never dies and about Henry being like a Younger Brosnan i'm not sure.
I think Brosnan was more manly,sire classically handsome but looked like a man Cavil is the definition of a pretty Boy.
Now i do think that after Craig they might go for a pretty boy if its not Cavill someone in his style.
In theory yes. However, that would also depend on the actor's ability and viability. They could have been done after one movie if CR sacked. They could have been done after 2 or 3 or could go on to make 8 movies; we'll never know. However, I'm terms of output at least by 2012 we would have still had only 3 movies. The writer's strike and MGM restructure were unavoidable. Anyway casting younger WILL happen once Craig is done, how young we don't know yet and their longevity in the role is uncertain. Lazenby had the potential to be the longest serving Bond, the offer was there for him to take but we all know how that turned out.
Oh I agree with you. I didn't, and still don't like the idea of the films being rebooted. But I could have accepted it, had they they done the job properly. By properly, I mean EON should have cast a younger actor, who could convincingly play the younger less experienced Bond, or scrap the reboot idea and continue as normal (follow DAD, but 4 years on).
Absolutely, I was never fond of the reboot thing, and it is my opinion they failed miserably with it and were very inconsistent, the most obvious mistake being keeping Judi Dench as M.
Yes, I agree. I'm assuming you're referring to this drawing:
Hiddleston can raise his eyebrows:
And looks good in tux:
I'd say he has a shot....
Moved from 6/1 to 4/1 odds
As much as I love Bond and Tom Hardy, I'm not sure they're a 100% fantastic match. I'd say Hardy is a lot more "street" than certain other actors...
EDIT: Also unlikely because he's probably too well known, expensive and busy (to echo the point of a Variety commenter).